It is a long journey between human being and being human. Let us travel at least one step daily to cover the distance.

Brief facts:-

2. On 28.04.2005, the first defendant, R. Sivasamy, the owner of the property executed a sale agreement in favour of the plaintiff, A.P. Subramaniam, for a total sale consideration of Rs.7,50,000/- in S.F.No.58, Patta No.17 of Chinaripalayam Village, an extent of 3.75 acres, out of a total extent of 7.50 acres of punja. An advance amount of Rs.1,00,000/- had been paid under the said sale agreement and the last date for payment of balance sale consideration of Rs.6,50,000/- was fixed as 15.07.2005. Since the first defendant mortgaged the suit property and other properties to the second defendant/Bank, on 03.04.2006, a legal notice was issued by the plaintiff, A.P. Subramaniam, to the first defendant, R. Sivasamy and the second defendant/Bank, stating that the first defendant had to clear the encumbrance existed in favour of the second defendant/Bank.

2.1. On 12.04.2006, a reply notice was given by the first defendant, wherein he admitted the sale agreement, but disputed the liability to execute the sale deed, as there was delay in payment of balance sale consideration. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance and pending suit, on 10.08.2007, a compromise was entered into between the parties and the terms of the compromise are as follows:-

1. That the plaintiff is hereby directed to pay the entire dues due to the second defendant/Bank within two months from today as per compromise memo dated 10.08.2007.

2. That the plaintiff is hereby directed to handover the documents, except the suit property document, to the first defendant, as per compromise memo, dated 10.08.2007.

3. That the plaintiff is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.4,75,000/- to the first defendant, within two months from today, as per the compromise memo, dated 10.08.2007.

4. That the first defendant is hereby directed to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff, after receiving the above said amount, at the expenses of the plaintiff, as per the compromise decree, dated 10.08.2007.

5. That the first defendant failing to comply with the clause No.4, above, the plaintiff is entitled to file Execution Proceedings against the first defendant, as per compromise decree dated 10.08.2007.

6. That both the parties do bear their respective costs and

7. That the compromise petition in I.A.No.995 of 2007 and the compromise memo, dated 10.08.2007 shall part and parcel of this compromise decree.

2.2. Pursuant to the compromise decree dated 10.08.2007, the plaintiff paid the entire due to the second defendant/Bank on 28.09.2007 and discharged the loan, by paying a sum of Rs.5,85,168/-, as per clause (1) of the compromise decree and the second defendant/Bank also cancelled the mortgage and issued the receipt dated 04.10.2007 for the amount of Rs.5,80,000/-.

2.3. On 04.10.2007, the second defendant/Bank handed over all the parent documents, which were mortgaged by the first defendant and as per clause (2) of the compromise decree, dated 10.08.2007, the plaintiff retained the parent documents with regard to the suit property and returned the remaining documents to the first defendant.

2.4. As per clause 3 of the compromise memo, dated 10.08.2007, the balance sale consideration of Rs.4,75,000/- was also ready to be paid by the plaintiff, but the first defendant failed to come to the Office of the Sub Registrar, to receive the above said amount and failed to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff till the last date i.e., 10.10.2007.

2.5. Hence, on 10.10.2007, the plaintiff has issued legal notice to the first defendant, calling upon to receive the balance consideration of Rs.4,75,000/- and to execute the sale deed, as per clause 3 of the compromise decree, dated 10.08.2007, failing which, the first defendant will deposit the said amount in the Court Deposit and will file the Execution Petition. The said notice was dul